The framework of the public discourse – the protection of reputation and honour in the case law of civil and criminal courts
The research, which is based on the collection and assessment of those court decisions that were made under the Civil Code of 2014 and the Criminal Code of 2013, aims to identify how the judicial practice interprets the boundaries of the public debates and discourse taking place in front of the general public. It is not the sole aim of the analysis to mark the boundaries of criticizing public figures in a narrower sense, but to take into account the judicial evaluation of all expressions available to the (narrower or broader) public, including the ones communicated in the media, the press, the online sphere (blogs, social media platforms etc.) and in any public forum (general meetings of multifamily properties, courtrooms).
The assessment of the cases will be conducted considering four aspects namely i) the definition of public figures and public affairs; ii) differentiating between the statements of facts and the statements of opinions; iii) the threshold of tolerance in respect of the statements made in the particular case; iv) the legal repercussion (sanction) applied in the particular case and the circumstanced that affected its extent. The aim of the research is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the judicial practice and to assess the practical effects of the legal norms that fundamentally affect the freedom of public debates.
Researchers participating in the project: